Home / General / What the Hell is Wrong With CNN?

What the Hell is Wrong With CNN?

Comments
/
/
/
625 Views

If the Steubenville rapists had been given lengthy prison terms in a maximum security lockup, the sympathy shown by CNN to the defendants would be defensible in the abstract, although clearly selective. But they were tried and convicted as juveniles and given relatively short sentences in a juvenile detention facility. It’s impossible to imagine CNN taking this tone for any violent crime except sexual assault.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Craigo

    The fact that two sex offenders must now register as sex offenders – that’s the real crime.

  • c u n d gulag

    CNN has been going downhill ever since the early 90’s, when Wolf Blitzer was hired.
    And it’s been getting steadily worse with each passing day.

    Coincidence?

    I think not.

  • Interesting that neither pointed out the fact that they destroyed their own frikkin’ lives, at bare minimum.

    Yes, it’s tragic that these two young men had a bright future and now it’s gone. Maybe if they hadn’t had people, men mostly, whispering in their ears about how entitled they were, that poor girl might never have been raped.

    • Pooh

      This touches on the extremely qualified way in which “sympathy” for the defendants is appropriate, in that there is a sense that they’re the ones left holding the bag for the entire fucked up microculture. But opinions like “well, they’re just the ones who got caught” might force us to reexamine the role sports in general and football in particular play in our lives and cultures.

      • ” force us to reexamine the role sports in general and football in particular play in our lives and cultures.”

        Or, ya know, not.

      • Sherm

        So, only football players rape drunk girls?

        • As someone who was comfortably a part of “jock culture” in an Ohio town not that very far from Steubenville and who attended quite a few high school parties in which quite a bit of drinking was done and (so far as I know) no one was raped…this is indeed news to me.

          • Leeds man

            Brien didn’t see nuffin, so nuffin to see.

            • Sherm

              And research pertaining to big-time college sports pertains to small town high school football how?

              • Pooh

                Ah the NRA “isolated incidents” defense.

                • Sherm

                  Ah the old strawman argument. I am not offering any defense, rationalization or justification. I am simply suggesting that young men do not need to affiliate themselves with a sports team in order to abuse and/or otherwise mistreat women and that to conclude that football was the cause of this rape is nothing but pure speculation which I — as a fact-based person — will not blindly accept.

              • Leeds man

                Brien’s the one making the link. He saw nothing in small town football, so, nothing to see anywhere.

                • It’s almost like that wasn’t quite the point.

            • By contrast, you will insist that college rape culture is totally limited only to male athletics teams, right?

              • Sherm

                Yeah, of course, you’ll never see a rape or a sexual assault in a frat house, or in the back of a bar, or in a dorm room, or at a house party, unless you have some football players present.

                • Leeds man

                  I know you guys aren’t this dense. Who said that only football players rape?

                • Sherm

                  Of course no one said that, Leeds man. But isn’t concluding (as others have, and not necessarily you) that football was the cause of this rape tantamount to concluding that these kids would not have been capable of committing this atrocity without football?

                • drkrick

                  Football seems to be a pretty important factor in the reaction of the community, which has been as monstrous, and possibly as damaging to the victim, as the rapes themselves. Discussing this case without mentioning football culture doesn’t seem reasonable.

                • Perhaps, but it’s not as though the same dynamic wouldn’t likely exist if it weren’t for football.

        • Pooh

          Yes that was clearly my point. Is there any particular question that this particular incident was caused at least in part by football culture? (And no, that’s not to excuse the defendants of culpability because there are literally millions if football players who don’t rape drunk girls).

          • “Is there any particular question that this particular incident was caused at least in part by football culture? ”

            Yes.

            • Barry

              In your mind, yes. In the minds of decent people, no.

              • Clearly society would never defend a young man who clearly raped a young woman is he didn’t play football! Does the evils of football culture know no bounds?!?!?!?

                • I suspect the difficulty here is that football culture, like gun culture, military culture, wall street culture, celebrity culture, etc., shares a significant memetic load with male privilege in general, which is going to encourage entitlement and dehumanization.

                  It’s not a football problem per se, it’s a problem that is abundantly present in social institutions such as American football, which is the case study we happen to be looking at right now.

                  So yes, there’s something seriously fucking wrong with football culture. Which is to say, it’s currently intertwined with rape culture, and we’d prefer it not be. I suspect we’re in agreement to this extent?

                • Well, no, the problem is that society as whole doesn’t take the crime of rape or the interests/perspective of rape victims seriously. I think there’s a word for that….oh yeah: Rape culture!!!

                • spencer

                  That’s *a* problem, Brien, yes. But to deny that football culture is (or at least can be) a major contributing factor to how these kinds of incidents unfold is just intentional blindness.

                • It seems to me that if we’re going to be invoking football culture here, we first need to establish some sort of likelihood that the event wouldn’t have happened without the specter of high school football/sports in general in the picture…and the actual landscape of rape cases in this country would seem to suggest otherwise.

                  Which is just to say that if there were no high school sports, it would be something else creating a quasi-privileged male class that, when coupled with rape culture in general, would lead said people to commit rape with assumed impunity.

          • LoriK

            I see no evidence that the rape was caused by sports culture. The reaction to it probably was, at least to some degree.

            • Very insightful.

            • I’m inclined to agree, but predator theory suggests that the two are not entirely unconnected. Rapists prefer to operate in environments in which they can expect to be protected should they be accused.

              • Which, in this country, is pretty much any case that doesn’t involve beating the living piss out of the victim or raping someone from a higher class than you.

                • Pretty much, yeah.

          • Sherm

            That’s nothing but bullshit speculation. Men and adolescent boys are quite capable of abusing and mistreating women without team sports, and without alcohol too.

            • Leeds man

              And with team sports, the problem is no worse than it would be without them? Shall I dig up some articles/links for you, or would they all be dismissed as “bullshit speculation”?

              • Wait, you’re not even actually talking about football culture, but just general participation in team sports?!

                • Leeds man

                  Yes, Brien. It goes back to Pooh’s “sports in general and football in particular”.

                • Oh, gotcha. So you’re not actually using appropriately referring to “football culture,” you’re just appropriating the term for an opportunistic shot at organized sports. At least we got that cleared up.

                • Leeds man

                  You’ve lost me. I don’t know what you’re talking about. I’ll summarize. We live in a rape culture. Arguably the worst of rape culture is found in situations involving bonded groups of males, in which aggressive behaviour is valued, and cover is given by superiors; (some) fraternities; (some) armed forces units; (some) sports.

                • So, in other words, you’re not talking about “football culture” at all. Just rape culture.

                • Leeds man

                  Oh, maybe you thought I was appropriating the term “football culture”? Where did I use the term?

                • Alright, it was Pooh who specifically used the term.

        • I think Pooh’s point is a little different than that. In this incident, only football players raped a drunk girl. It bears some looking into and contemplating whether the microculture around them enabled that sense of entitlement.

          • drkrick

            Only football players were charged. There seems to be quite a bit of rumbling that others were involved who were not foolish enough to document their participation.

            • OK, I’ll add that only football players were proven to be rapists. Fair enough?

      • Shakezula

        What microculture? When did the culture of women = sex toys become micro? And why was the change so quiet? I would have expected more … screaming.

        • Pooh

          To be clear, I’m not limiting myself to sex crimes (which are simply the ugliest manifestation) in suggesting that in a decidedly non-zero number of high schools and colleges, there is a tacit acceptance of a certain degree of lawlessness. I don’t know if football specifically is to blame (roster sizes make non-scientific comparisons harder), or its “glamour sports” in general.

          • DrDick

            There is certainly a culture of entitlement in the “glamour sports”, which can feed into this kind of behavior (though it does not directly cause it). It also manifests itself in a lot of other unwholesome ways.

          • Shakezula

            It couldn’t be the fact that (for example) males are still taught that in certain cases having a hard on makes it OK to stick your dick a non-consenting human being.

            Yeah, I know. it would be really nice to say this wouldn’t have happened except Football (or Sports.) You’re fooling yourselves.

            • Leeds man

              Nobody is saying rape wouldn’t happen without male sport culture. But it often gives males a sense of entitlement and “permission” they wouldn’t otherwise get.

              • In this instance, that seems to be a strong likelihood, or perhaps a justification on the part of the rapists.

              • Shakezula

                No, that loops back into “I have a hard on.” One of the exceptions to non-consent from the dick receptacle is quite likely “I’m a football player.”

                Do all football players think like this? Of course not. Just the assholes who don’t understand consent. Would they find another exception if they weren’t football players? You bet your ass. “Hey she was drunk.” “Well, she’s a slut anyway…” &c.

                • Sherm

                  Just the assholes who don’t understand consent.

                  Bingo! And those assholes are everywhere, unfortunately.

                • DrDick

                  I think this is basically the point several of us are trying to make here. It is not that it is just athletes or that it is all athletes, but that in glamour sports, there is often an extra element of entitlement that expands that “I have a hard on” exception. It also provides the basis for this kind of reporting.

              • Alternatively, we could theoretically have a male sport culture that rarely/never gave protection or justification to rapists, but we don’t. And that’s a goal worth pursuing. Nobody is suggesting that sports, as a concept, must be destroyed.

          • djw

            But is it a “sport” or “football” culture, or an “successful participants in high-status, widely admired social activity” culture? At first glance, it seems to me they thought they could (and should) get away with this for reasons similar to Roman Polanski’s similar view. Perhaps “football” is doing some specific work here that “generic high-status achievement or activity” would not do, but it’s not clear to me precisely what that is.

            • There’s an old saying among cops that a uniform lying on a bed could get fucked. It ain’t just sports, no.

            • Sherm

              Good point. And let me take that one step further — what about the high school football players at the party who are the 20th or 30th or 40th best players on the roster. Do they have the same sense of entitlement? Are they less likely to stand up to the rapists and to stop the assault than any random, non-football player their age?

              Your typical high school football team contains a pretty diverse group of students.

              • I’m betting the back up punter never rapes anyone.

                • witless chum

                  Attempted murder, on the other hand….

            • Leeds man

              The specific work done by team sports is concentrating aggressive young men in groups, often (no, not always) with implicit backing of bad behaviour from their coaches. But yes, it’s only a subset of the wider status/entitlement phenomenon.

            • Maybe the same sort of thing that led them to be charged as juveniles when they clearly should have been tried as adults!

            • Shakezula

              Or you know, they’re guys in a society that is still remarkable hostile to women.

              • Leeds man

                It’s not “or”. It’s “and”.

  • Derelict

    It’s unimaginable to me that CNN, or any news organization, would take such a line. I would think that, because everyone at CNN loves a woman in their life–sisters, mothers, wives, daughters, etc.–that they would want the message to go forth that

    It is NOT okay to “take advantage” of someone who is too drunk to consent.

    Simple human decency should make that statement self evident. But I guess CNN’s drive to position itself to the right of FOX precludes that.

    • Origami Isopod

      because everyone at CNN loves a woman in their life–sisters, mothers, wives, daughters, etc.

      First of all, many people at CNN are women. Women, too, propagate rape culture.

      Second, the “what if it were your sister/mother/etc.?” question is a dead end. See, their sister/mother/etc. is virtuous and would never get publicly drunk or be raped or anything like that. This kind of thing happens only to “sluts.”

  • Shakezula

    First of all, I’d like to throw up on the “reporters'” expensive shoes.

    Second, I didn’t attend a school with much in the way of a sports program until post grad. The constant harping on their promising careers as football players reinforces all of the worst stereotypes I’ve heard about star athletes being worshiped.

    As an aside, I do know enough about sports to say that there’s a huge gap between the number of kids who show promise and the number of kids who ever have the barest chance of having a career as a pro. athlete. I am able to figure this out even though I suck at math. This is a long winded way of saying that if you call a high school player’s career promising you are experiencing a severe break with reality or trying to create a narrative that just don’t exist.

    Maybe we’d see the same disgusting display if they were average students who were on the debate team. Somehow, I doubt it.

    • First of all, I’d like to throw up on the “reporters’” expensive shoes.

      Or their faces. Or down their throats.

      Okay, my preference would be to load them into a trebuchet and aim them at a cliff wall.

      • Shakezula

        Sold!

      • Rhino

        You want an onager for that. Trebuchet are like mortars: high arcs to go over walls. Onagers are battering weapons.

        • Malaclypse

          That depends: if you are on top of the cliff, firing out, you want a trebuchet. If you are at the base of the cliff, firing in, an onanger.

          Always use the right tool for the job.

        • I dunno. The trebuchet would throw a high fly to the top of the wall, and you’d get the double thrill of the splat followed by the slow smeared slide down to the ground.

          • Shakezula

            I love that in Serious Discussion about rape, I can get a short intro to ancient projectile weapons.

            XXXOOO guys, even if you are members of the penis bearing imperialistic pig dog class.

            • I wear mine proudly, often outside the confines of my clothes.

              • Shakezula

                Is that an ancient projectile weapon in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

    • About 3% of HS players play college football and about 3% of college players ever play NFL football. That means about 0.09% of kids get a chance to go pro. Or that 99.1% only have an illusion.

      On the other hand, their experience is not necessarily a handicap at the collegiate level although it would have been better if they hadn’t been caught.

      • The percentage is lower than even that. How many kids don’t even make the high school football team who think they could play pro ball before they’ve even tried out? Maybe 1 in 2? 1 in 3?

    • DrDick

      Silly rabbit! Everybody knows that only (mostly white) male athletes have a future. Certainly 16 year old girls do not.

      You are far more generous than I am. I want to take a baseball bat to those assholes.

  • ChrisTS

    Let’s make the grotesquery even more clear: these were two female ‘reporters.’ Further, the victim was an Honors student; she might have had a rather bright future herself.

    • Yes, but she *was* just a lowly female. Nothing worth getting upset over.

      It is, after all, very sad that these promising young rapists may not get the opportunity to rape multiple women in college, too.

      • Cody

        I’m going to say you’re being a bit cruel here, and that isn’t at all the thinking of people not thinking about the girl.

        It’s not that she’s a useless female, it’s that she “just” got raped, and it won’t ruin her life at all!

        Of course, this is a stupid thought. But I think it goes further in addressing the stigma around the situation better.

        • True, that would likely to be part of it. The perception that because she wasn’t also beaten during her rape means she was never really damaged or harmed.

          Still, this attitude from Candy Crowley seems way out of character for her, who proved during the debate that she does her homework. I’m sad it was not.

    • GFW

      “might have had”? I hope she still does! This was a terrible trauma and one I wouldn’t expect anyone to “just get over”, but it needn’t destroy her life. I hope she achieves great success in her chosen field while her assailants stumble through failure after failure.

      • ChrisTS

        +1

      • Linnaeus

        I hope she achieves great success in her chosen field while her assailants stumble through failure after failure.

        I certainly hope the best for the victim and I agree that we shouldn’t be too concerned right now for the futures of the perpetrators.

        That said, I’m not sure that I want the perps to stumble through failure after failure if for no other reason than there might be social and human costs (to others) for those failures.

      • drkrick

        I share your hope, but you might want to look into the effects of PTSD. Short of a name change and some plastic surgery, she will be living with the reality that thanks to the internet this whole nightmare can re-explode in her life at any moment for the rest of her life.

        I’d find it very hard to argue that the odds of her having a happy, successful life are anywhere near as good as they were a year ago.

        • GFW

          I’m married to someone who used to treat PTSD, so yeah, unfortunately your statement is correct. But we can still hope for the best outcome. Maybe due to the high profile of this case she’ll get some top flight counseling.

        • JL

          PTSD is horrible. And it’s true that she’ll be facing a lot of obstacles that she didn’t before. But I think it’s pretty important not to send the message that your life is forever ruined if you are raped (even if you end up with PTSD as a result). Millions of women in this country, and some non-women too, have been raped. About a third of them, according to the National Center for PTSD, will have PTSD at some point during their lives as a result. That’s an awful lot of people. Most if not all of us here probably know someone in this category, even if we don’t know it (and some of us may even be in this category ourselves).

          • Origami Isopod

            I agree.

            That said, I think the best people can do is hope she has a much better life ahead of her, without imposing any expectations. Because nobody knows but her, and not even yet, how she will be able to cope with the PTSD.

  • Anonymous

    As others have pointed out, compare the reaction to the India rape case – “Wow, those people are barbarians…look how civilized we are.”

    • ruviana

      This.

      And in light of the earlier comments about football, note that the recent rape cases in India were GANG rape. Men and boys in groups can egg each other on and someone who might not rape alone will in the group. This discussion reminded me of the case in Cleveland, TX as well.

  • Shakezula

    Oh, to answer the question. It is clear CNN has become infected by GOP Derangement Syndrome, a symptom of which is to believe the real victim is guilty and the guilty is the real victim.

  • Aaron B.

    I didn’t notice anyone lamenting the tragic destruction of her bright future at Casey Anthony’s trial.

  • anon

    If the victim had been black and both perps white, CNN would have covered it differently. I can’t think of any other reason why CNN’s actual coverage was so warped. Think of how CNN covered the Duke lacrosse case and the Trayvon Martin case.

    • Yeah, that horrible Trayvon Martin, getting in Mighty Whitey’s way.

      And Emmett Till got too much positive coverage, also too.

    • ChrisTS

      I don’t understand what ‘reason’ you think you have uncovered here.

      • anon

        I don’t think you don’t understand, but to spell it out: CNN over-played cases with black (alleged) victims and non-black (alleged) perps. CNN under-played a case with an actual white victim and 50% (actual) black perps. (You can lead a horse to water . . . .)

        • Yo, and how come Boyz II Men are considered booty music but Backstreet Boys are corny?

        • Ah yes, the dreaded REVERSE RACISM–the only kind that actually exists, as we all know. Why can’t the white man ever get a fair shake in this country?!?

          • anon

            never said or believed that it was the only kind that exists — but your need to falsely attribute that to me tells me a lot about you.

            • God knows if you’re fooling yourself, but you’re sure as hell not fooling anyone else. Shitheads like you can’t go extinct soon enough.

    • JMP

      Wait, how do was the coverage of the Trayvon Martin case – in which a racist piece of shit shot and killed a black teenager just because he was black, and a bunch of his fellow racist shits still keep yelling about how that should be perfectly OK – “warped” exactly? What, should they have been more fair to the racist shitheads who think the presence of a young black dude somehow justifies being so scared you shoot and kill him?

      This makes no sense whatsoever.

  • Steve M. nails what happened in his last paragraph:

    So reporters and analysts at CNN seem to have let the watchability of a new piece of video drive their moral and factual conclusions about the entire case.

    That’s it, exactly. CNN is a crappy news organization, and they base their reporting on stories around whatever eye-catching video they have in front of them at any particular moment.

    • Shakezula

      See also the Iraq thread – discussions of news coverage. Shit blowing up. Clean cut kids crying. Maybe we get them hooked in to some sort of Cat Cam to keep them out of trouble.

      • Snarki, child of Loki

        Please, think of the kittens.

      • See also the Presidential debates they host. “Senator, what do you think about what your opponent said about your response to his response to your ad?” Let’s you and him fight!

        Gripping TV!

        • Shakezula

          But first, important breaking news on Lindsay Lohan’s 5,653rd DUI conviction!!!

          • Didn’t they just do a story on Lindsay Lohan’s 5,653rd DUI?

            That was the plea hearing. This is the sentencing.

            Ohhhhhhhhh……

  • Joshua

    Have they ever shown this level of sympathy, say, kids that get churned up in the justice system and denied student aid in college because they get caught with some weed in their pocket?

    • JKTHs

      Of course! They have segments on it everyday.

    • Only if it’s a Kennedy or a Bush.

  • MacK

    Actually, and maybe I’m weird, while I do believe that these guys deserve to be punished, I am not wholly without sympathy with the view that they have made a disaster of their lives and their futures and that this is not a good thing for them, or for society. You have two young men who, it seems, were on their way to college from an area with at best a poor economy, who now will serve time in detention and for the rest of their lives will always have their presence on the sex offenders register to deal with. They will have a very hard time getting employment and their education prospects are from this point forward pretty near nil. They will live 40-70 years on the boundary of society, unwelcome even to have an apartment anywhere.

    Who is the blame – well they obviously carry a lot of the blame, but so does Steubenville, so does their school, their families and so does the society they grew up in. However, these two young men are being forced to carry the entire load for their societies failings – as a way of proving that the entire sin, the entire wrong was theirs. That is a lot of what the real message in the case is “it’s not us [i.e., Steubenville, Ohio, USA] it’s just them.”

    In any event, I am not accusing the posters here of it – but there seems to me to be an undue amount of gloating of the mess that some 17-18 years olds have made of their lives – this young woman’s life, etc. It is a shit-sandwich all around.

    • Pooh

      This is a clearer statement (especially the second graph) of what I was trying to get at above. It’s not that we have a problem here, it was just those two bad kids. Everything is a-ok here now that they’ve been punished.

    • Shakezula

      However, these two young men are being forced to carry the entire load for their societies failings – as a way of proving that the entire sin, the entire wrong was theirs.

      That would apply to any crime. Poor Bernie Maddoff. Just a product of our society’s greed.

      No thanks.

      • MacK

        And the Madoff son who hanged himself? And Madoff by the way was an adult and a well off adult when he made the very adult decision to start his Ponzi scheme.

        Looking at these two kids – one at least never had a father around. Both seems to have been part of a local jock culture (not suggesting it extends to Brien Jackson’s town) that gives complete licenses to young men to behave badly and perhaps glorifies drunken antics. Do you really think that if these two guys had not been better raised, in a better culture, they might have thought before they took advantage of a passed out drunk 16-year old?

        It reminds me of ancient sacrifices in which an animal, a goat for example, would be loaded up with everyone’s since and then driven out of the community into the desert, leaving purity behind. The societies that used this strategy found they had to do it every year.

        I don’t think you have any idea what this conviction means. It is not just 1-2 years in juvie. These kids are going to have their names on the sexual offenders register for life. Have you seen the protests that spring up when someone on the register moves into a condo, a trailer park, near anything where kids congregate? They cannot join the military, cannot get all sorts of professional licenses, even minor ones, probably cannot get a college education, will have trouble getting a job and will get fired the first time someone Google’s them – and they are 18.

        Now maybe you are so pure that you did nothing bad ever in your life. I am sure you never sexually assaulted anyone – I certainly never did. But are you such a prig that you did nothing bad at all before you were 21 – are you that pure? Can you think of something you did that you would not want raised every-time you applied for a job, looked for a home, went out on a date?

        Vengeance sounds great until you think about the ramifications – of don’t think about it.

        • MacK

          “loaded up with everyone’s sins”

        • Can you think of something you did that you would not want raised every-time you applied for a job, looked for a home, went out on a date?

          For the rest of her life, that girl is going to have to deal with the fact that a group of shitheads shoved stuff into her and pissed on her while she was unconcious, recorded it and sent it around to people she knew.

          If you don’t want to have your raping someone raised for the rest of your life, then YOU SHOULDN’T RAPE ANYONE.

          • Anna in PDX

            Yeah, although I am a huge bleeding heart and don’t agree with some of the sex offender stigma laws that don’t apply to other crimes, particularly if they have served their time, I have trouble finding any concern in my heart over these particular boys. What they did was so very evil.

            That said, I do think there is an issue with stigmatizing sexual assault over other crimes – not only is it a sort of forever punishment for the perps which does not apply to other crimes, even major felonies, but it also contributes to the stigma felt by the victims in our society, a reason for why many victims of rape won’t testify or report, which is a really bad thing as well.

          • Shakezula

            Please note that indiscretions committed as a kid are the same as raping someone.

            You know, throwing bottles at a cat, sticking your dick in a girl who is passed out drunk and tweeting about it.

            Potaytoe, Pahtatoe.

        • sapient

          I completely share your sympathy. I also think that sex offender registries are horrible innovations.

          These boys committed a crime, and I’m glad they were convicted, but the life sentence of a sex offender registry is not right – not for these guys or for anyone. (Not to mention the fact that sex offender registries also bring suspicion upon people with similar names.)

          • MacK

            I have to say that I do think the sex offenders’ registries may be necessary and useful, even in many case a life presence, especially when there is reason to believe that the person convicted has a predisposition towards sexual offences. But are these two boys in that category? Do we know? In 1-3 years what happens if they are reformed young men – but still on the registry?

            • ChrisTS

              As I understand it, Ohio does not keep their names on the registry forever.

              • They are minors. I would imagine they’d be expunged at some point after achieving majority age

            • In the case of juveniles, there needs to be some kind of periodic review, or chance to challenge the status later in life.

              Otherwise, what’s the point of even having a separate juvenile justice system?

        • Lyanna

          Now maybe you are so pure that you did nothing bad ever in your life. I am sure you never sexually assaulted anyone – I certainly never did. But are you such a prig that you did nothing bad at all before you were 21 – are you that pure?

          I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone. If I had, it should follow me around the rest of my life.

          I’ve been sexually assaulted. Not nearly as brutally as this girl, either. That will follow me around the rest of my life, no matter what.

        • Do you really think that if these two guys had not been better raised, in a better culture, they might have thought before they took advantage of a passed out drunk 16-year old?

          Oh. Hell. Yes. How much better an upbringing and family could you possibly want?

          • God bless the Kennedys, but I’m not going to hold that family out at the epitome of how to raise your boys to respect women.

            • There are some pretty strong women in that family, and also, there’s the whole “education” thing that they seem to insist on.

              So not perfect, true, but certainly beats a single parent home where (usually) mom has to work two jobs to support her son.

              • Origami Isopod

                I don’t know. There are single-parent homes where the mother is damned tough and she gets respect from her son[s]. There are double-parent homes in which Dad passes all sorts of toxic patriarchal shit onto his son[s].

                • Oh yea! Just not in this case. The OP was raising the issue whether single parenthood and a broken home was to blame. My point was you could have everything nearly perfect and still raise a screw up.

        • This is pretty weak sauce as far as vengeance goes, methinks. If I committed a crime, it wouldn’t be any kind of *revenge* if other people knew it had happened.

          And yeah, there’s lots of things I’ve done that I wouldn’t want coming up every time I apply for a job or housing. They’re embarrassing. But not one of them was actually a crime, i.e. an action so deleterious that we’ve collectively decided it must be punished with violence. It’s just embarrassing shit. Since it didn’t actually hurt anybody, I’m allowed to not think about it most of the time, and I’m not called upon to disclose to my employers that I drank too much and wrote whiny, self-indulgent blog entries after getting dumped by the cute lit major who lived down the hall.

        • Shakezula

          OK, well played. You had me until you suggested that any indiscretion as a kid is the equivalent of a crime.

          Next!

        • Anonymous

          Do you have any notion of what’s happening to the victim already? People who live in her town and attend her school are threatening to “beat the shit out of her” and (more widely) publicize her name. She’s lost “friends” over this because those friends are happy to believe she’s lying or exaggerating or taking things too far–the ridiculous bitch, thinking she has a right to live her life without being drugged and raped.

          Your concern about “absent” fathers and implicit remarks about bad home lives (bad mothers, you mean) have been noted, and have been found to resemble racist and classist dogwhistles. Shut up.

          • Anna in PDX

            How in the hell, I don’t even get how anyone no matter how awful they are can blame her for the rapists taping and distributing the crime. I hate humanity sometimes. Argh.

            • STH

              Her life was being threatened yesterday on Twitter. Two people were arrested today for threatening her.

          • Origami Isopod

            Racist, classist, and misogynist. Because it’s not like a stupid woman can keep those boys in line. They need a man, even if it’s a man who tells sexist jokes and calls his female co-workers “honey.”

            • Anonymous

              Oh, yes. That generally goes without saying, but yes, thank you for making that clear. Handwringing over the Single Mother Phenomenon is yet another way of saying bitches ain’t shit.

        • JL

          There’s a pretty reasonable argument that our justice system is too focused on punitive measures and sending people into a prison culture that only propagates and reinforces violence, and that this argument applies as much to rapists as to anyone else.

          This isn’t it. So one of them didn’t have a father around…so what? Are we going to shift blame to single mothers, female/female couples, etc, now, because they didn’t do a “better” job raising their kids? Rape culture is certainly a thing that exists, and that is worse in some places than others, but most people who live immersed in rape culture still don’t rape anyone. You can make an argument about prisons and the justice system, that would apply to these boys as much as any other incarcerated person, without letting them partially off the hook.

          And yeah, plenty of people do “bad things” before they’re 21 (or at other times). Most of them don’t rape people. This isn’t smashing mailboxes or shoplifting.

        • Origami Isopod

          Do you really think that if these two guys had not been better raised, in a better culture, they might have thought before they took advantage of a passed out drunk 16-year old?

          Rich boys tooooooootally don’t rape, oh, no. And William Kennedy Smith is just one example out of many.

          These kids are going to have their names on the sexual offenders register for life.

          GOOD. Because I’d sure as shit want to know if that kind of scum were living in my area, so I could avoid them.

          Now maybe you are so pure that you did nothing bad ever in your life.

          Another commenter here who’s never raped anybody. Unless you mean to say that littering, cheating on your taxes, etc. etc. is just as bad as rape?

          Vengeance sounds great until you think about the ramifications

          This wasn’t “vengeance.” This was justice. If you can’t see the difference, you’re part of the problem.

    • I think the difference between a civilized person and a less-than-civilized person is not society. After all, there are tens of thousands of young men in Steubenville who grew up with that same culture who managed not to stick their dick in where it wasn’t wanted.

      This isn’t Jean Valjean here. They weren’t make a difficult decision.

    • Anonymous

      The tale of woe re the two guys’ lives you’re trying to paint here is histrionic to the point of MRA-ish. They’ll be fine. Most rapists, particularly high-profile ones, are. The world will want to see them succeed.

    • Joe

      They will have a very hard time getting employment and their education prospects are from this point forward pretty near nil. They will live 40-70 years on the boundary of society, unwelcome even to have an apartment anywhere.

      How do we know this? Are you saying, unlike many in prison as adults for heinous crimes, they will have no ability to get education, including given — more so than some — they will get assistance as part of their sentence and oversight by the state? Where do other registered sex offenders live if they will be “unwelcome” to get an apartment “anywhere”? How in the heck do we know what will happen to them 70 years from now? This is laughably exaggerated.

    • Origami Isopod

      They will live 40-70 years on the boundary of society, unwelcome even to have an apartment anywhere.

      What absolute fucking bullshit. So many people in Steubenville and surrounds think they they were hard-done by some “slutty” teenage girl, they’ll be welcomed home from juvie with open arms, and they’ll always be able to make a living in that area.

      but there seems to me to be an undue amount of gloating of the mess that some 17-18 years olds have made of their lives – this young woman’s life, etc.

      Yeah, you know what? When rape finally gets taken at least partly seriously in a courtroom? You’re damned right I’m going to gloat at the rapists.

      Fuck you and fuck your civility trolling.

  • quickly

    even althouse is on the right side of this one. however, the comments to her post are hilarious as always.

    I give you “Dante,” who apparently raises livestock and has interesting ideas regarding irrepressible urges, evolution, and so on: http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/03/candy-crowley-oozes-sympathy-for.html?showComment=1363596481282#c92419058863018814

    I can’t unimagine this now.

    • Uncle Kvetch

      Boy, you sure know how to sell a truckload of mangoes.

      I wouldn’t click that link if my life depended on it.

    • witless chum

      I clicked. Never has the figurative use of the phrase “keep on fucking that chicken” been more apt.

      • S_noe

        Dante uses coding as a metaphor for social policy and raises chickens. Am I shallow for wondering where the fuck this dude lives and what he’s got going on in his life? I suppose the lesson is: he could be anywhere (that doesn’t stringently enforce laws against backyard livestock). So lock your doors.

        • commie atheist

          As an example, I offer up my experience with my rooster.

          Worst “Dear Penthouse” letter ever.

          • Barry Freed

            +1

          • quickly

            “As an example, I offer up my experience with my rooster.”

            This could be a general tag for the hyperlocal and vague evidence offered up by a typical althouse commenter to make over-reaching statements about how things should or do work in society.

    • SEK

      It’s not just chickens. It’s all kinds of mammals.

      Um…

  • Glenn

    I think it’s important to distinguish between comments that seem to lament the fact that the defendants were convicted and punished — which, I agree, CNN would never take that view on a different crime — and the comments about it being difficult to watch the sentencing. I clerked in federal district court and, let me tell you, it IS hard to watch anyone being sentenced, even when you know they are guilty and they did very bad things. The impact not just on the defendant but their families, friends, etc., is a terrible thing. Frankly, if you don’t feel some discomfort by it, you’re not much of a human being, IMO.

    • Sherm

      I think it is fair to say that this is a tragedy all the way around. But the problem is that the sympathy has often been misplaced. It seems that many are looking at this from the “those could have been my sons” perspective, rather than the “that could have been my daughter” perspective.

      • LeftWingFox

        It would also be nice if anyone who felt “Those could be my sons” took the time and effort to ensure that it COULDN’T; i.e. making damn sure their kids know what “enthusiastic consent” means, and to stand up to a culture that makes light of rape and blames the victim.

        • MacK

          Exactly.

        • GFW

          +1
          Perhaps a good place to point out that depending on which studies you believe, somewhere between 4% and 12% of men commit rape during their lives. Definitely room for improvement in parenting.

          • LeftWingFox

            Agreed. And even if we don’t get that number to 0, at least we can create a culture where people who are rapists aren’t given cover by people who aren’t.

            There’s a vast mismatch between the number of actual sex offenders out there, and the number of women who have been sexually assaulted; most of these shitbags are repeat offenders, and they are allowed to be repeat offenders because of all the peers and authority figures pressuring victims and the minimizing the crimes.

        • Sherm

          Good points. But as a married person, I’m a little intimidated by your enthusiastic consent standard.

          • delurking

            Well, you shouldn’t be.

            I’m teaching a Woman’s Lit class right now — 16 women, one guy — and this issue *just* came up. “So the woman says no fifty times,” I said, “and the guy keeps asking, and she says yes, finally, the 51st time, just to get you to shut up. Is that consent? Is it okay if the guy keeps going?”

            The guy says, “Hell yeah it is. Yes means yes.”

            I’m here to tell you, hell no it ain’t.

            I mean, sure. Technically you’re okay there. You’re on the right side of the fucking LAW dude.

            But you’re having sex with a woman who does not want to have sex with you.

            And there’s a word for that.

            • Sherm

              It was a joke (regarding marriage, and not rape), delurker. Enthusiasm can sometimes be lacking after a long day at work, after dealing with the children, cleaning up the kitchen, and walking the dog, etc..

              • delurking

                Oh. It was a joke. About rape.

                Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

                • Sherm

                  Or marriage.

                • No, it was a joke about marriage. Maybe more of a groaner, but still.

                • Sherm

                  Guess I’ve been watching too many Everybody Loves Raymond reruns this winter. Thankfully, baseball season is just two weeks away.

                • Apparently, when my wife and I were trying to have a second kid, we used to rape each other all the time.

                  Or you’re an asshole. One or the other.

            • L2P

              What’s the word? Reluctantly (as in reluctantly consenting)? Regrettably (as in she will regret consenting)? Unfortunately (as in she unfortunately consented to something she did not really want to do)?

              If you’re trying to imply that lack of enthusiastic consent means rape, you’re just wrong. But you can still remind yourself to call the cops the first time your partner says, “Eh, I’m kind of tired, but OK” when you suggest having sex.

          • LeftWingFox

            Uncoerced consent is probably more accurate, but I think it’s smarter rhetoric to quibble about what counts as enthusiasm rather than what counts as coercion.

            • L2P

              The phrase you’re looking for is “consent.” Consent is always uncoerced; it it’s coerced it’s NOT CONSENT. If you hold a gun to someone’s head and say, “Say yes to sex with me or I kill you,” that’s, you know, NOT CONSENT because it’s coerced.

              Enthusiastic consent isn’t a thing, legally. It’s a thing, socially, that doesn’t work for most people but is an interesting concept to work with.

              • And reluctant sex is a somewhat necessary thing in marriage, for reasons that should be fairly obvious. Unless you have an open marriage, I guess.

          • JL

            I realize that you were making an (honestly not very funny) joke here, but this is relevant to this subthread. Depending on how strict your workplace is, may be mildly NSFW.

        • Karen

          I have to take this chance to brag on my own 14-year-old son, about whom I have complained on this very website before, who is taking part in a sexual assault prevention rally at his high school and on his own iniative. I had exactly zero to do with it, and neither did “it will look amazing on my application to Brown,” since he didn’t know he could list that experience until I told him, after learning about it. Andy has also dropped male friends whom he learned had bragged about their sexual exploits and then called the girls names later. He’s only one kid, but I thought the thread needed something hopeful.

          • Leeds man

            That is something to brag about. Sounds like the lad was brought up right.

          • STH

            Thanks for this, Karen. I need to hear some good things today. And you should be proud of him.

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        i think people need to think “that could have been *me*”

    • Shakezula

      True, but I still expect a certain sense of detachment from the press in all but the most shocking events. Silly me, I know.

      But I don’t need the reporter to emote for me. I think most human beings have the requisite level of empathy that they’re able to at least think “Damn!” or “Glad that isn’t me.”

  • cpinva

    you failed to mention his buddy:

    http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/03/candy-crowley-oozes-sympathy-for.html?showComment=1363596481282#c92419058863018814

    who is upset, because nowadays, having sex with an unconscious female, who was ok with it when conscious, would be considered rape.

  • MacK

    About the blaming the victim argument – this is more complicated than it first appears. I wholly agree that at the end of the day the victim did not deserve to be raped or assaulted.

    But in saying don’t blame the victim we need to be careful about one issue – the “don’t be stupid” principle. Society is not perfect – people get mugged, raped, assaulted. Getting drunk to the point of passing out is not wise – it is a bad idea, a serious mistake. It is not a mistake involving moral turpitude as sexually assaulting someone who is in that condition is, but it is a mistake of judgment and good sense. So for example when you see the slut-walking phenomenon – I am not uncomfortable with the message that a woman or a man should be able dress as they like without it justifying rape, sexual assault, etc. I am uncomfortable with promoting the idea that it is advisable to do so.

    Two days ago I had to step out of a lunch to take a call – and I stood on a business call I saw a youth of around 17-18 manhandling a 15-16 year old girl who evidently was unhappy with his behaviour. The looked like boyfriend and girlfriend – but things reached the point where I felt it necessary to intervene. Of course he started cursing at me and she started yelling it was none of my business as he tried to drag her down the street. Now does she deserve what he may do to her – or was she just being stupid? I think the latter and I hope someone explains to her why she does not have to tolerate or excuse such loutish behaviour, and why she does not deserve it and he is not entitled to act that way. I do admit though that the thought that popped into my head was “what a moron she is.”

    • Lyanna

      Ah, so you’re full of sympathy for the young men who, because of rape culture, think they can rape who they want. But women who, because of that same rape culture, do “stupid” things like drinking to excess and believing a man is justified in abusing them are just “morons”?

      Nice.

      • Sherm

        There are plenty of 20 year old pictures of me in circulation with tons of make up on and my nails painted a nice bright red. That’s what happens when a young man does stupid things and drinks to excess.

      • MacK

        No, I think that in a culture that tells a young woman regularly that a young man is not entitled to manhandle her, and is afforded an opportunity to tell him to get lost, but decides that it is nonetheless OK for him to behave that way is being a moron and quite quite stupid.

        Just as I think that someone who tries to twist my comments to say ” full of sympathy for the young men who, because of rape culture, think they can rape who they want” is intellectually dishonest and a bit of a fraud.

        My statements- were you honest enough not to distort them – tried to make the point that in a “rape culture” as you call it, it is intellectually and morally dishonest to pretend that two young men are entirely responsible for behaviour that the social group they were in clearly tacitly endorsed and indeed seems to have celebrated. This two boys, immature, dumb teenagers were part of a culture where everyone seems to have thought that what they did was just clean fun – and happily sent around pictures laughing at the story. Had they not been raised in such a “rape culture” it is highly likely that they would not have behaved the way they did. Should they be punished – of course – but punishing them does not absolve the society they were in or stop me from sympathising about the wreck that that “rape culture” has made of their lives as much as their victims.

        When you get a moment of honesty, consider is it intelligent for anyone, let alone a 16 year old girl to drink to the point that she has in effect a 6 hour blackout – in a “rape culture?”

        Look at it another way – a point recently made to me by a feminist lawyer I know about rape – that it’s treatment in many respects is patriarchal and reflects the idea of a woman’s sexuality as a possession of the men in her life (her father, husband, etc.) She pointed out that until fairly recently in many jurisdictions a charge of rape actually had to be brought by the victim’s father or husband (this may still be the case in more tribal places)

        The lawyer in question went on to point out that while rape is an assault, often violent, young men were in fact subject to violent assaults resulting in permanent and irreparable injury and death at rates that are a multiple of what young women suffer. Yet as a society we are so very much more concerned about sexual assault than young men being stabbed, shot, crippled – her explanation (and she had a point) is that it seems that we place a lower value on the lives of young men and boys – relating it back to the old father/husband had to bring a rape charge.

        Incidentally, the young woman and the young man I referred to above were both quite sober. He was been a lout and she was tolerating it.

        • Responsibility is not a zero-sum game. It does not diminish individual responsibility to recognize societal responsibility, and vice-versa.

        • rea

          If, in another context, you were to make the point that it’s a bad idea for a 16-year old (or anyone else) to get drunk to the point of blacking out, few would argue with you.

          If you say that in the context of a discussion about rape, though, you’re blaming the victim. Drunk, stripped naked, dancing on the table–it dosn’t matter. Nothing–nothing–justifies rape. And if you don’t think you are talking about justifying rape–why are you changing the subject, then?

          • Anna in PDX

            This.

          • MacK

            I’m not changing the subject – what I am saying is that pretending that someone should not take care for their own personal safety is not helpful. That does not mean that they have a moral responsibility for a wrong done to them, or that their being drunk should afford a wrong doer a defence. It does mean that educating young people to have good judgment is important and pretending that bad judgment had nothing to do with being vulnerable is a bad thing.

            Let me put it another way, would you advise that a friend, relative or daughter get drunk as you describe? Would you warn them of the risks they run? Are you morally reprehensible for giving such a warning? Because to be blunt, you have just treated the idea of warning young women and men that if you get blind drunk you may not be able to protect yourself as a morally repugnant thing to do.

            • Scott Lemieux

              what I am saying is that pretending that someone should not take care for their own personal safety is not helpful.

              I’m sure the zero people who have ever made this argument found your rebuttal very convincing.

            • JL

              Part of the problem here is that girls and women get this message constantly. All the fucking time. You’re acting like without your counterweight to all those anti-rape activists complaining about victim-blaming, nobody would ever hear the message that public drunkenness is a potential safety hazard.

              The hazard there, of course, is not limited to sexual assault, or women (as you acknowledge, to be fair), and when people make it specific to sexual assault, then yes, they are victim-blaming.

          • MacK

            Where did I justify rape pray tell – give me on statement in which I said rape is justifiable? Be honest rea – can you find one?

            Didn’t think so because I did not.

            • El. Oh. El.

            • Malaclypse

              give me on statement in which I said rape is justifiable?

              Now that is how to shift goalposts.

            • Sherm

              Assuming, arguendo, that you are not justifying it, you are at the very least rationalizing and explaining it by focusing on the behavior of the victim.

              If this was your daughter or niece, how would you feel about people expressing their sympathy for the assailants after sentencing while discussing the need to teach young girls that they shouldn’t get drunk so that they don’t get raped?

              • This. Especially since approximately no one disagrees with the general notion that we should teach young women how to best protect themselves, even if that has to stop somewhere short of “never go out of your house and act like you’re a normal human being like the boys.”

              • MacK

                No, I am not rationalising it by focussing on the behaviour of the victim. What I am saying is that in ignoring the conduct that made the victim vulnerable to being attacked, in saying that discussing that conduct is SO TOTALLY OFF LIMITS, we are creating a problem, because we are refusing to educate young people as to what can put them in danger.

                To take another example – why is it that stranger rape is being deemphasised. The reasons are threefold – because (a) because stranger rape is in reality quite rare, acquaintance rape more common. In promoting the idea of stranger rape one creates a false sense of safety – this victim in fact knew her rapists; (b) police tended to take acquaintance rape less seriously because they had doubts on consent; and (c) because jury and court perceptions that rape was a stranger with a knife made securing convictions tough. As a result it was wise to deemphasise stranger rape to more effectively present rape.

                Do I have sympathy for the perpetrators – not much. But I do recognise that they were young men in a culture which on its face if not endorsing their behaviour, certainly did not see it as particularly wrong. Had they been taught different values their lives now would not be wrecked – and the blame for that extends well beyond them.

                • “What I am saying is that in ignoring the conduct that made the victim vulnerable to being attacked, in saying that discussing that conduct is SO TOTALLY OFF LIMITS, we are creating a problem, because we are refusing to educate young people as to what can put them in danger.”

                  Thankfully absolutely no one would disagree with that. So you’re gonna drop it now, right? Right?

                • Sherm

                  About the blaming the victim argument – this is more complicated than it first appears… But in saying don’t blame the victim we need to be careful… See Mack Comment, 1:47 P.M..

                  Sorry, but the “punishment” of rape does not fit the “crime” of teenage drunkeness. Rather than worrying about our need to teach girls to be “smart” about what they wear and to stay sober, why don’t you worry about teaching boys to be civilized and to respect women and their bodies?

                • “Taught different values”, like, I dunno, “Don’t have sex with someone who is unconscious?” or, “Don’t rape people?”

                  Why is this so difficult?

              • chris

                Assuming, arguendo, that you are not justifying it, you are at the very least rationalizing and explaining it by focusing on the behavior of the victim.

                I think it would be more precise to say that he is blaming both sides, which is a pretty assholish thing to do given that the victim has already been victimized and doesn’t really need more dumping on.

                Also, one of the first principles of most systems of morality is that a crime and a blunder do not weigh equally, even if their consequences are the same.

        • Lyanna

          No, I think that in a culture that tells a young woman regularly that a young man is not entitled to manhandle her, and is afforded an opportunity to tell him to get lost, but decides that it is nonetheless OK for him to behave that way is being a moron and quite quite stupid

          This proves you don’t know what you’re talking about. Many young women in this society are not told regularly that young men are not entitled to manhandle them, or if they are, it’s drowned out by the opposing message. See teenagers’ responses to Chris Brown.

          And yes, if you sympathize with teenage boys who rape, you are full of sympathy for them, and you are being dishonest if you diminish their full responsibility. Plenty of young men in this self-same culture do not rape.

          As for your last MRA-ish (yeah, sorry, your “feminist” lawyer friend isn’t feminist at all) nonsequitur about society being “more concerned” with sexual assault than with stabbed young men–show me some actual evidence of greater societal concern for rape, or for its victims, than for male victims of assault.

          • MacK

            Well since she represented a 12 year old that was raped and being denied an abortion – at the risk of her life – I think I respect her feminist bone fides a lot more than I respect yours,

            • delurking

              Okay, time for a poll: Who believes MacK’s straw-feminist lawyer actually exists?

              • MacK

                I do, I even know her name. And a feminist lawyer would have a good idea who she is. Many have heard of the case, it was a cause célèbre at the time.

                • If it is true that it was a cause célèbre and this person is a public figure, then what is the difficulty in naming her?

            • Yeah, no. Being on the right side of such an absurdly easy case is a really weak demonstration of feminism.

              It’s like saying you’re a racial-justice crusader because you oppose slavery.

              • MacK

                Joe, it was not in Lowell or even in the US – so frankly you don’t have a clue what you are talking about. Death threats, pickets, hangup calls, the whole thing.

                Of course we all know that Lowell is the center of the world.

                • Your ability to miss the point is really impressive.

                • I’m quite aware that you’re talking about Brazil, asshat, because pregnant 12-year-olds don’t have to sue in court to get abortions in the US. Duh.

                  Living in a retrograde society and not being retrograde does not, as it turns out, make on a feminist.

                • Well, at least, it doesn’t make one some sort of uber-radical feminist capable of bestowing feminist cred on rape apologists like mack here.

                • MacK

                  Not Brazil asshat

            • Origami Isopod

              You really need to read up on what feminism is. Because you have no damn idea.

              http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/

          • MacK

            Lyanna, you don’t know where the incident took place. Rest assured she is regularly told that such behaviour is unacceptable. By the way, he did not impress me as a genius either.

          • djw

            Plenty of young men in this self-same culture do not rape.

            Indeed, our society has changed considerably; rape is less socially acceptable and tolerated than it used to be, and the rate of rape has fallen considerably, at least partially as a result. The cultural resources available to support the choice to not be a rapist have probably never been more robust.

        • JL

          I wish society was as concerned about sexual assault as you or your friend seem to think.

          Which does not preclude also being concerned about young men being victimized by violence.

        • Origami Isopod

          About the blaming the victim argument – this is more complicated than it first appears.

          No, it isn’t. You’re dragging out the same bullshit I’ve seen on every other fucking rape discussion on the internet: acting as though women don’t already know all these things; like we don’t have it drilled into our heads from childhood; how we limit our worlds, quite often, based on it — and how boys are ALMOST NEVER correspondingly told that we’re anything but acceptable targets.

          And, yeah, sorry, but you don’t get to use some 15- or 16-year-old girl, who has little life experience and who hasn’t completed her cognitive development and who is marinating in the same toxic culture as the rest of us, as your excuse.

          Just as I think that someone who tries to twist my comments…

          Fuck your refusal to own your own weasel words, fuck you for putting sneer quotes around “rape culture” multiple times, fuck your “What about the menz” shite, fuck your placing the responsibility for men’s behavior on women’s shoulders, and fuck your derailing of this entire thread with the same kind of crap that allows this shit to go on and on and on. Asshole.

    • Getting drunk to the point of passing out is not wise – it is a bad idea, a serious mistake.

      I didn’t follow the case that closely: was any mention made of why she got this drunk in the first place?

      Also, a party with friends sounds like a pretty safe place to me to let your hair down and yes, drink to excess. It’s not like she was in the middle of the street on St Patrick’s Day or something like that.

      • John F

        Also, a party with friends sounds like a pretty safe place to me to let your hair down and yes, drink to excess.

        Depends on who your friends are.

        • witless chum

          Yup. Most sexual assault are committed by someone known to the victim.

          • In the context of a large gathering, tho?

            • chris

              I think the large gathering makes it *more* dangerous. A party is only as safe as the most dangerous person there. They can and will find ways to get you away from anyone who would be inclined to intervene (assuming they would anyway, which you can’t count on).

              But that kind of after-the-fact analysis isn’t really helpful.

    • witless chum

      I’m not a very good person, because I read that, MacK, and I hope bad things happen to you so we can pick over your decisions and clothing choices. So, I’ll try to be nicer and just ask, “Is there any evidence that women dressing sexily raises their chance of being sexually assaulted?” As far as I’m aware the answer is no.

      The idea that we need to, as a society, use the threat of rape to convince people getting blackout drunk is a bad idea seems pretty obtuse to me. There’s other reasons one can use, (such as the fact you can die from alcohol poisoning) without resorting to arguments that sound almost indistinguishable from yelling at the victims of rape for their terrible sluttishness. We know for a goddamn fact that some victims hear things like this and take it as “Your rape was your fault.” We know for a second goddamn fact that this line of defense is often used by rapists to try to poison the well and get away with their crimes. So I think maybe we can just go with “Don’t drink to oblivion, you might die.”

      • MacK

        I am not saying the young woman’s rape is her fault. I am saying that to get blind drunk or wander bad neighborhoods carrying an iPod or trust a bunch of drunken jocks is to put it mildly unwise.

        • witless chum

          And, again, you know for a goddamn fact that by saying so, you’re going to make rape victims feel worse. You can read their accounts on the internet if you search, including accounts of how messages like the ones you think are so important make them feel after the fact.

          So, you still want to do that for some pretty debatable benefits? People who do the above-mentioned things are probably by definition not thinking to straight and are engaging in the natural human tendency to think that bad things won’t happen to me.

        • Yeah, okay. I grew up not that far from Steubenville, in a town pretty damn similar to Steubenville, and as such I’m fairly comfortable assuming that the “bunch of drunken jocks” in question were people that, prior to that night, so considered to be her friends. Using your standard, we might as well just go full Saudi and advice young women to never leave the house without a male relative, because any time spent alone with a boy could potentially end in rape.

          • Actually, that doesn’t work either, since male relatives can certainly rape women too. Guess we’ll just have to cloister all the females away in convents straight from birth. For their own good, ya know.

        • Lyanna

          It’s unwise to say shit like this on a woman-friendly blog. People will think you’re a rape apologist, and let’s face it, you’re basically asking for it.

          • Oh NICELY played!

          • Oh, nice.

          • Turn the lights off everyone, the internets is over for the day.

          • Malaclypse

            You win the thread, as well as five threads to be chosen at a later time.

          • MacK

            Maybe, but then I’m not big on adjusting the point to humor an audience.

            • Holy….dude just go drink yourself to sleep already.

            • I’m not big on adjusting the point to humor an audience.

              So how’s that point going?

            • Origami Isopod

              Those silly chicks, gotta humor them, because they think they know what they’re talking about when it comes to rape.

              Again: Fuck you.

          • *bows* Well played.

          • I am very late to this thread and feeling rather sad about it and then Lyanna saves the day with the sheer force of her awesome wit.

          • Barry Freed

            Lyanna, please pick up your internet at the front desk.

        • Anna in PDX

          The only way to stop rape is for people to stop raping. Second guessing the decisions of the victim is a way to change the subject. This conversation has been had over and over and over and over again. It is very clear. If you don’t want to be a rapist don’t rape. There is nothing else to say. And yes focusing on the victim’s wisdom or lack thereof IS changing the subject no matter how well meaning you think you are. For no other crime is this as widespread a derailing tactic. A lot of people who are burgled, have identity theft etc. happen to them could have done something different but the onus is on the perp not the victim as it SHOULD be. Rape isn’t different.

          • JL

            This.

          • chris

            If you don’t want to be a rapist don’t rape.

            ISTM that the problem is not the people who don’t want to be rapists — they already aren’t. It’s the people who DO. Real rape prevention (more effective than what we already have) would mean finding them before they have already done the damage. And how do you do that, exactly?

    • Funny thing: when I was in high school we had lots of parties that ended in multiple people, some of them females, ending up pass out drunk and (so far as I know), no one was raped. Amongst the primary reasons, I would imagine, is that we generally thought that it was partially our job to look out for our friends and not turn into predatory rapists just because the opportunity was there!

      • +1

      • Sherm

        This. I recall many girls passed out drunk at many house parties in high school, attended by many athletes. The girls were left alone in spare bedrooms, where they were checked up on by friends to make sure that they were okay. People joked at their drunkenness, but the main concern was always the girls’ well-being and getting them home without getting them (or anyone else) in too much trouble.

        This is not about football or team sports. Its about a lack of human decency and a lack of respect for others.

        • Right, and the ultimate point is that the girls had every bit of a right to have the same teenage/growing up the experience the boys did, and the right to feel like they were safe engaging in risky but normal teenage behavior amongst their friends.

      • Amongst the primary reasons, I would imagine, is that we generally thought that it was partially our job to look out for our friends

        You seem to have to considered the young women to be part of “friends,” as opposed to “the girls at the party with our friends.”

      • MacK

        And? So did I. I also when in college 30 years ago found in the apartment upstairs a guy trying to have sex with one of the girls who lived there while she was unconscious (not doubt, she was out cold, he was on top of her trying to get her pants down) – this was because a friend of the three girls upstairs pounded on my door to come up and help. I threw him down 3 flights of stairs and then dragged him out of the house by his heels – 10 granite steps, boppity boppity bop.

        The next morning they would not only not file charges or tell me and several other guys at the party his name – the person I dragged him off complained that I was “mean to him.” At least the little shit had a very sore head and a kick in the balls to teach him something.

        I grew up in an environment where you do not allow anyone to behave as these guys did – but then I was lucky and so were you. Not all men are raised see it as their “job to look out for our friends and not turn into predatory rapists just because the opportunity was there.” Hell some are positively encouraged to take the opportunity.

        • But that’s a problem with THEM, not with girls thinking they get to have the same experiences boys do without having to worry that their friends might hurt them.

          • MacK

            Well, deunken boys get badly injured and attacked a lot.

            There is a problem with the idea that you should not mention that someone was drunk when raped or violently attacked because it may make them feel worse. Not recognising that being blind drunk makes you vulnerable and downplaying the vulnerability that too much alcohol creates is to make generations of future young worms and men vulnerable.

            You can condemn those who take advantage of someone being drunk all you like – and you’d be right, but such people do exist as this case shows. Pretending that being drunk to the point of having six missing house at sixteen did not make this young woman vulnerable is not helping keep other young women out of her situation. Pretending that alcohol does not impair young men’s judgment or moral faculties is equally unwise.

            Given he aftermath of the assault/rape (I think it was rape) it is evident that these two young men existed in a social group that seemed to have a boys-will-be-boys, it’s all clean fun and anyway “she deserved it the slut” mindset. Did that social group make them rapists – in a different environment would they have behaved differently.

            One point – only a nut would think that the Catholic Church thought paedophilia was a good thing. Yet the church sustained a culture which fostered such conduct even while deploring it.

            • Not recognising that being blind drunk makes you vulnerable and downplaying the vulnerability that too much alcohol creates is…

              not happening anywhere.

              Pretending that being drunk to the point of having six missing house at sixteen did not make this young woman vulnerable is…

              also not happening anywhere.

            • MacK

              Worms is autocorrect on my iPad not intentional

            • MacK,

              Saddam Hussein did many terrible, stupid things in the years before the invasion of Iraq.

              Nobody is talking about them in the thread about the US invasion, even though many people are quite comfortable discussing that topic elsewhere.

              Why do you think that is?

              • MacK

                I don’t know – when people ask me about Saddam Hussein I tend to mention that he and his sons were pretty awful people. The question is did removing Saddam make Iraq or the Middle East a better place? I’m inclined to think it did not (and to the extent that anything is better now, it probably could be achieved with less cost), but I’ll acknowledge that stopping his family fun was a positive in gross terms – the question is whether the outcome is a net positive. Certainly from the perspective of the US and the UK it seems to be to be a serious net negative – from the Iranian regime’s perspective it has been just jim-dandy – and that is without counting the casualties of the Iran/Iraq war which ran into millions.

                • You don’t know?

                  Give it some thought. Mull it over. Let’s see what you come up with.

            • Malaclypse

              Well, deunken boys get badly injured and attacked a lot.

              I spent my youth consuming dangerous levels of many types of chemical intoxicants on a frequent basis. I was never in any realistic danger of being raped.

              One of the items I plan on getting mini-Mal for her 12th birthday is a bottle opener, with a discussion how she is never to drink anything from an open cup, nor from any bottle or can she did not open herself, or one she placed down at any time. This is because her risks will be far worse than mine, even if she is nowhere close to as stupid as I was.

              Pretending that rape is not something some men do to punish women for exercising their rights, including the right to be stupid, is bullshit. And statements like “well, it is always a bad idea to be drunk” obfuscate what is going on. The statement may be true enough on its face, but in context, it is rape apologetics. Full stop.

              • MacK

                Actually, I have no idea why some men rape women – or whether they are “punish women for exercising their rights, including the right to be stupid.” Indeed I rather doubt that that many rapists even think about it on that level.

                Rape is a crime and most criminals are opportunists.

                • Nope, totally not a rape apologist.

                • witless chum

                  Most armed robbers are opportunists, stop running a corner a store like a shameless hussy.

                • Origami Isopod
                • chris

                  Rape is a crime and most criminals are opportunists.

                  Most criminals aren’t rapists, though. Crime isn’t a homogeneous blob. Different criminals commit different crimes for different reasons. They even commit similar crimes for different reasons.

                  I won’t claim to be an expert on the motivations of rapists either (and, for that matter, different rapists might commit rape for different reasons too), but if you’re not, you probably shouldn’t just assume that they’re the same as the motivations of other sorts of criminals.

            • Joshua

              There is a problem with the idea that you should not mention that someone was drunk when raped or violently attacked because it may make them feel worse.

              Nah bro, it’s not that it will make them feel worse. It’s that the drunkenness really doesn’t have as much to do with the rape as you think it does.

              If I get drunk and pass out, my friends laugh at me, I wake up the next day, no harm done. My lapse in judgement turns out to be a victimless crime. A girl who got too drunk really is harming nobody but herself. I think most of us have had situations where we had six (or more) missing hours after/during a night of drinking, it was stupid yes, but it wasn’t an invitation for someone else to come and violate us.

              And that’s really it. We’re talking about two decisions here. One, the decision to drink to excess – it’s dumb, but that’s about it. One, the decision to rape someone – it’s not just dumb, it’s reprehensible and a crime.

        • Origami Isopod

          Shorter MacK: If there are women out there who have low self-esteem, who have been convinced by the surrounding culture that they’re just fucktoys, who might be intimidated at the idea of turning in their potential rapist… then maybe stupid bitches better get smarter, rather than us blaming the poor menz.

          Also MacK didn’t get any cookies for throwing the rapist downstairs, and that hurt his ickle feewers.

    • Karen

      “Don’t be an idiot” is good advice, but it is not and should not be a defense to prosecution. It is also pretty good advice to men who think having sex with an impaired or unconscious woman is a good idea. It. Is actually a lot easier to ask the woman if she wants to before staring something than it is to guess exactly the square inches of skin that must be covered in order to be considered virtuous.

      • MacK

        “Don’t be an idiot” is good advice, but it is not and should not be a defense to prosecution.

        Agreed – the adage that “God protects fools, drunks, and children” is nonsense, prosecution at least creates consequences for taking advantage.

        I am always mystified by anyone who “who think having sex with an impaired or unconscious woman [or man] is a good idea” or even desirable. (I also wonder at people who have sex in airliner bathrooms – yuk, or cars (uncomfortable.)

        • Anna in PDX

          See, you putting rape in the same sentence as vehicular (consensual) sex is a really weird thing. What are you trying to say? One is morally wrong and a crime. The other is like deciding to wear a different color of shirt.

          • MacK

            How am I putting it on the same level. I am pointing out that I have absolutely no idea what the attraction of sex with someone drunk or impaired is – even if consensual. The idea of why anyone would want to rape someone is frankly mysterious to me. I understand the argument that it is a about power, but completely about power – there is a sexual component.

            • Anna in PDX

              What turns people on is always hard to figure but in the case of nonconsensual sex I guess they are just damaged people whose attitudes have been formed by rape culture. Or, they are sociopaths who enjoy hurting others. Or, one creates the other.

    • drkrick

      I’m just going to observe that the “don’t be stupid” principle, while valid, seems to come up with a lot more enthusiasm when discussing rape than when discussing other crimes. That’s part of rape culture.

      When I got mugged while walking downtown late at night, no one suggested that the hour and the location somehow mitigated the responsibility of the thieves. If someone was being date raped in one of the neighboring buildings at the time, that victim wouldn’t have gotten the same consideration.

      It’s certainly true that 15 year olds shouldn’t be getting blind drunk. But bringing it up in order to label her stupid in this context is kind of an … interesting … choice.

      • MacK

        That depends on whether I would describe other conduct as stupid, like flashing a large roll of cash in a deprived neighbourhood. Poor judgement simply is poor judgment – stupid behaviour does not have a gender label.

        • That depends on whether I would describe other conduct as stupid

          No, it really doesn’t.

          “I say similar things in other contexts” doesn’t really address the point “There’s a problem saying that in this context.”

          • MacK

            And that problem is?

            • Malaclypse

              That, in this context, it is victim-blaming.

              Do we need to use smaller words? Because lots of people have said this over and over.

        • Origami Isopod

          That depends on whether I would describe other conduct as stupid, like flashing a large roll of cash having a vagina in a deprived neighbourhood in the vicinity of rapists.

          FTFY.

          (And, yes, men are raped, but I can’t imagine MacK would be prattling on the same way about male victims being “stupid.)

    • Anonymous

      If it’s “inadvisable,” according to you, for women to dress the way they want (like men are free to do) and behave the way they want (like men are free to do) and navigate the world freely (like men do), because men are liable to hurt them because they are women, then the problem is with men, and men ought to be held responsible when they interfere with women’s rights to live like full human beings. Putting the onus on women for correcting men and preventing their own assaults will never work. If men can’t control over themselves around women, they need a mandatory curfew and an escort, to keep them on the straight and narrow.

      • Anna in PDX

        Yes, just like how in Israel Golda Meir said that the curfew should be on the males since they were the perps and not the female victims.

        • MacK

          Golda Meir had a point

          • Anna in PDX

            I was stationed in Saudi Arabia when they caught a peeping tom watching the women in the female only gyms. They immediatly closed all the gyms. So yeah you are right she had more than a point. Why can’t everyone just try not to limit the victims, but rather go after or contain the perps?

  • John F

    The idea that we need to, as a society, use the threat of rape to convince people getting blackout drunk is a bad idea seems pretty obtuse to me. There’s other reasons one can use, (such as the fact you can die from alcohol poisoning)

    well getting blackout drunk is a bad idea because of the possibility of:
    sexual assault
    theft
    liver damage
    alcohol poisoning
    progressive brain cell death
    vehicular homicide/suicide

    If you are trying to warn someone about the dangers of getting totally shitfaced I don’t see any reason for leaving any negative repercussion off the list.

    • MacK

      Yep

    • Anonymous

      Making rape illegal will encourage the lushes to get lushier, and this offends my delicate sensibilities. Therefore rape is a good and proper punishment and we must Leave it On the Table. (I am not a loonie.)

      • CaptBackslap

        I’m positive that isn’t what he meant, but I agree that it’s not a good route to go.

        On the other hand, you can certainly argue that committing a felony of some sort is a serious risk of binge drinking, since a majority of prisoners were under the influence of booze or drugs when they did the crimes for which they’re doing time.

        • Anonymous

          No. The repercussions of getting pissed out of your gourd is that you’ll do something stupid to yourself or someone else. Being raped can happen to anyone at any time; sobriety does not improve one’s chances (and insisting that the onus is on women to curve men’s behavior is nothing short of victim-blaming). Being male-bodied does. Note the difference.

  • tonycpsu

    Meanwhile: stay classy, Fox.

  • John F

    I would truly like to apologize to [redacted], her family, my family and the community. No picture should have been sent around, let alone even taken.

    No pictures should have been taken????
    I once did a deposition where the defendant, a “financial adviser” who’d stolen millions from his clients, volunteered that he felt bad that he steered his clients to a mortgage broker who’d charged exorbitant fees costing his clients perhaps a couple thousand –

    of course he’s remorseful that pictures were taken- if none were taken the odds were he’s never even indicted- where’s the apologies you know for actually assaulting her?

  • John F

    Possibly dumb question- a lot of ice has melted the past decade- doesn’t ice absorb a lot of heat energy before it actually melts?

    so the “missing” temperature increase energy could have just gone into melting ice?

    But then again I’d think that those who make these models account for that…

    • Yes, it melted the ice, by adding sufficient heat to something frozen and thus raising its energy state to fluid.

      That’s, um, sort of the problem, you see.

  • rea

    No pictures should have been taken????

    Mays–the guy who said that–was convicted on a seperate count of child pornography for taking the picture and putting it on the internet. It sounds strange out of context, but it’s certainly appropriate for him to apologize for doing that.

    • Sherm
      • rea

        I can’t get too upset when a little mercy is shown to clueless kids. Note that the girls in the photos (who took nude pictures of themselves and sent them to their boyfriends, only to have them rebroadcast to the whole world) are technically guilty of manufacturing child pornography themselves.

        Few people understand that it can be legal to have consensual sex with a minor over the age of consent, but it’s a serious felony to take a sexually explicit photo of the same minor.

        • Sherm

          I can’t get too upset when a little mercy is shown to clueless kids.

          I generally agree, but this one pissed me off. Those girls sent those pictures to their “boyfriends” with the expectation that the pictures would be automatically deleted in ten seconds. But the little bastards took screenshots prior to deletion and published the screenshots on instagram and facebook. While the girls have been humiliated and embarrassed, the boys will suffer no consequences, whatsoever.

          • As these are warnings and not actual punishments, you might be jumping the gun a bit. It’s an attempt to scare the girls into not sharing the photos in the first place.

            Note what the letter the district is sending out actually says:

            Ridgewood School Superintendent Daniel Fishbein sent a letter to parents of middle and high school students warning, “…The possession and/or transmission of sexually revealing or explicit images, or any materials of that nature, constitute the very serious crimes of possession and transmission of child pornography.”

            This seems to infer that posting a photo you receive someplace else would also be construed as the transmission of child pornography.

            Which it seems to me, it would be just that.

            • Sherm

              This seems to infer that posting a photo you receive someplace else would also be construed as the transmission of child pornography.

              Which it seems to me, it would be just that.

              Yes. And that is exactly what the boys did in Ridgewood. Yet, the police gave them five days to delete in order to avid pressing charges. Why such leniency? The girls did something stupid, while the boys did something criminal. Yet, only the girls will suffer any consequences.

              • Bill Murray

                didn’t both the boys and girls do something criminal? Both the transmission and possession are crimes

                “…The possession and/or transmission of sexually revealing or explicit images, or any materials of that nature, constitute the very serious crimes of possession and transmission of child pornography.”

              • In fairness, the girls believed they were posting transient photos that would self-delete after ten seconds. The boys took screen shots and saved those, so in truth, the boys are more to blame and more to fault. That the authorities demanded deletion (let’s assume it happens for the benefit of this post) means that they want to ignore the whole mess. No one gets prosecuted or further injured.

                Besides, you don’t think someone who saw those Facebook and Twitter posts didn’t rip some of those boys a new one?

                • chris

                  In fairness, the girls believed they were posting transient photos that would self-delete after ten seconds.

                  IANAL, but I’m not sure that would have any impact on the criminality of their actions. Child pornography laws are extremely broad (starting with the definition of “child” being expanded to people who are trying to explore their own sexuality of their own free will).

                  The boys took screen shots and saved those, so in truth, the boys are more to blame and more to fault.

                  Morally, sure (I for one wouldn’t consider the girls “at fault” at all in a moral sense). Legally, well, IANAL. I would hope that a prosecutor would have enough sense not to prosecute the victims even if their actions were also technically illegal, but I wouldn’t rely on it.

        • CaptBackslap

          It’s like how in most states, it’s legal (although extremely skeevy if you’re over like 19 or 20) to have sex with a 17-year-old you meet at Hardee’s or whatever, but illegal to proposition one online, because of a bill sponsored by (surprise!) Mark Foley.

          Not that there’s anything weird about how our culture deals with adolescent sexuality or anything.

    • John F

      ok that makes some sense
      but perhaps he should also apologize for not putting his camera away and you know, trying to stop the assault

      • Chesternuts

        My main point was that American banking regulators — the FDIC included — have repeatedly failed to follow the law which mandates that no bank be allowed to go into a negative capital situation. Yet despite this the FDIC has shown an actual loss repeatedly when it has closed a bank since 2007.

        The GM bailout, and TARP, and ObamaCare are only other predecents of so-called “tax” raping the people’s hard-earned money.

        • Chesternuts

          oops, wrong thread. It was meant in reply to Malaclypse.

          • Malaclypse

            Which makes sense, since the FDIC has nothing at all to do with GM.

            I blame Satan, and iconoclasm, obviously.

            • Chesternuts

              GM was only a precedent of raping the people by stealing their money in order to bail out cronies.

              The clearest precedent is MF Global; Cyprus is like the MF Global theft on a national banking scale.

              Cyprus was goaded and then harvested by the International Monetary Fund, which is chaired by Christine Legarde, who’s a Chicago playah placed at the IMF by the Obama régime and the banking oligarchy.

              • Origami Isopod

                GM was only a precedent of raping the people

                No.

              • Steven Crowder? Is that you?

  • Chesternuts

    Meanwhile, banksters are raping Cyprus, with outright confiscation of bank deposits and brokerage accounts. Soon the same things will happen in the USA to retirement assets such as 401ks and IRAs.

    Why? Because the precedent has already been set !!

    The USA allowed the GM bailout to take place where the seniority of bondholders was RAPED while the UAW was made whole.

    The USA’s outstanding debt went from $6 trillion to $16 trillion in 10 years.

    The USA is becoming Greece and Cyprus.

    There’s around $20T retirement “assets” in the USA. Something like a a 7% “one time” tax levy on those assets will fund the US Deficit.

    Banking regulators havefailed to follow the law on Prompt Corrective Action which mandates that no bank be allowed to go into a negative capital situation. Yet the endemic corruption and fraud throughout the system allowed negative capital — like it happened in Cyprus.

    Your money is going to get stolen — like it is being stolen in Cyprus now.

    • Malaclypse

      Oh my God! You say bondholders and sub debt were behind wage claims at GM? Fuck, that makes this exactly like every bankruptcy ever!

    • Chet Manly

      What’s happening in Cyprus (and Greece, and to lesser extents Iceland and Ireland) can only happen because they are a small economy and part of the Eurozone. They can’t use monetary policy to adjust the attractiveness of banking in Cyprus, that allowed their banking debt to climb to over 800% of their national GDP, and because of that their national deposit insurance can’t do a damn thing to keep their banks solvent.

      The US has its own currency so it can easily make currency adjustments and make US banking less attractive to foreign investors and avoid letting our banks get over-leveraged. The US economy is also so massive that there is almost no danger US banks could get so over-leveraged that the federal government literally could not do anything substantial to help them. US banking debt would have to be around 120 trillion to put us in Cyprus’ situation. That is nearly twice the gross world product and around 63% of total global debt.

    • There’s around $20T retirement “assets” in the USA. Something like a a 7% “one time” tax levy on those assets will fund the US Deficit.

      So, double taxation?

      How liberal of you!

    • chris

      The USA allowed the GM bailout to take place where the seniority of bondholders was RAPED while the UAW was made whole.

      I just have to say that whatever glitch caused this comment to show up on a post about an ACTUAL rape case is extremely disturbing. The resulting comparison between rape and *some people losing some money* is, well, obscene. Even though it wasn’t specifically intended. (I think.)

  • John F

    Why? Because the precedent has already been set !!

    The USA allowed the GM bailout to take place where the seniority of bondholders was RAPED while the UAW was made whole.

    Not analogous at all, in fact what happened here with GM is the opposite of what is happening in Cyrus vis a vis who is getting effed and who is being made whole, but thanks for playing anyway.

    • Chesternuts

      The best precedent is probably the MF Global theft.

      The MF Global accounts were fully-backed demand deposit accounts; they were used to margin the account holder’s positions on Futures and Options; they were the sole, private property of the account holders. Yet they were stolen by Jon Corzine, the CEO of Mf Global.

      • Chesternuts

        Cyprus is like the MF Global theft on a national banking scale.

        Cyprus was goaded and then harvested by the International Monetary Fund, which is chaired by Christine Legarde, who’s a Chicago playah placed at the IMF by the Obama régime and the banking oligarchy. Cyprus is Legarde’s play; it is testing the national banking level, and then it will happen in the USA.

        They might go to bank holidays or they may do a “tax” levy confiscation like Cyprus (but on retirement accounts).

        • Uncle Kvetch

          Christine Legarde, who’s a Chicago playah placed at the IMF by the Obama régime and the banking oligarchy

          As crankery goes, this merits a C+ at best. Needs more Trilateral Commission and Queen of England.

          • Malaclypse

            No, no, the insistence that a French woman, who, you know, never studied or lived in Chicago, who was nominated by an IMF board where the US does not hold a majority of the votes, is “a Chicago playah placed at the IMF by the Obama régime” is a solid .9 on the LaRouche Scale.

            • Anna in PDX

              I know right? Wow. How many times has all that tinfoil attracted lightning strikes?

          • Chesternuts

            Seriously — Legarde was a partner at Baker & McKenzie before being placed at the IMF; clearly within the Chicago oligarch circle.

            Baker & McKenzie is an international law firm, founded in Chicago in 1949 by Russell Baker and John McKenzie. It is home to more than 4,000 lawyers spread over 72 offices in 45 countries.[2] The firm has opened five new offices in the past 2 years in 26 of the world’s 30 largest economies.

            • Oh! I see! A woman who left Chicago in 1999, was somehow influenced by a state senator (insert ominous organ chord here: Dah dah duhhhhhhhhhhhh!) who was still wet behind the ears in 1999!

              Oh, well, yes, makes perfect sense to me!

              Never mind that she was an intern to Congressman William Cohen (Republican, Inc. – Maine) OR that she was in Villepin’s cabinet. You know, Villepin. Of Sarkozy’s party.

              It might help if you read up just a bit, Jenny.

  • Pingback: More Monday Night Links | Gerry Canavan()

It is main inner container footer text